Jump to content
IGNORED

CSF


Super

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

I'm a Weetabix kinda guy & love cats. I therefore hate you & want to fight you at the next opportunity. 

Weetabix??

That means you must be gas. I’m coming for you!!*
 

*But only if you agree, we meet at a pre-ordained place, and nobody who doesn’t want to fight doesn’t get caught up and we let them walk past unmolested. Unlike those ****s from The Cornflakes Hit Squad, The Ready Brek crew and The Shredded Wheat boys, the FSF (Frosties Service Firm) stand alone in the breakfast firms as not punching innocent fans. Obvs.
 

Edited by Silvio Dante
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Rebounder said:

Good post that seems to have gone un-responded too. A lot of the rivalries are built around this and other aspects such as class/political divides. Runs out of steam as an idea though when you think about City fans kicking off in Middlesbrough for example as what is the rivalry there other than that both teams had firms? (Random example) I think you have the roots right and then it sort of became its own beast and effectively culture. (Correct me if I'm wrong those that were involved) 

 

Cheers and yes, fair point.

As you say it has acquired its own momentum beyond local rivalries; I saw one northern, Sheffield IIRC, ex-hooligan saying that "firms" used to look at the number of arrests / banning orders as a marker of relative status as there was effectively a parallel league as to who was the top firm.

Though as an example of local rivalries expressing themselves in violence Cornwall up to recently had a long tradition, back to the 18th century, of teatreats organised by the local Methodist churches.

From the 1950s and into the 1960s these became associated with brawls on the side so that you would have Camborne take on Redruth with the winners fighting Hayle.

If such can go on under the auspices of church festivals then football, a game with working class roots and codified from a far more violent street version of the game, was always likely to be adopted as the preferred medium given that regular inter-town meets were part and parcel of the game.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/cornwall/content/articles/2009/05/04/teatreat_history_feature.shtml

Add in drink and even the most placid people start to become aggressive.

Exhibit A 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ska Junkie said:

Without getting political, why is 'all lives matter' provocative? I don't get it Marcus.

 It's a fair question, and it's one of context really.

As I'm sure you know the "Black lives matter" slogan is quite a few years old now, highlighting social and systematic racism. There have been a few high profile events in recent years, especially in the US.

An important part is that saying "Black lives matter" isn't saying all lives don't matter.  "All lives matter" was and is primarily said as some weird response to saying "Black lives matter", and seems to imply that the problems it's trying to highlight should be downplayed or are ignored because what about other problems. Nobody is denying other groups and people also face huge challenges and issues in their lives, which of course matter, but that kind of thinking means nothing will get done about anything. You can always point to other problems and say "Well why are you helping X when Y exists???".

It would be slightly analogous to if you had a family member who had breast cancer (as I have) and went on a charity walk to raise money for it. In response, you had people up there with "All cancers matter" banners, or saying "So what you don't care about my heart disease?" or "Yeah so you want to cut my diabetes treatment do you?" and so on. Provocative in my mind, to use your word. Other people have said if your house was on fire, and your neighbour was demanding the firemen also spray a load of water on their house, because their house matters too.

Further on from that actual racists (and I'm not saying everyone who says "All lives matter" is racist, to be clear) have then co-opted the phrase to intentionally shut down discussions about racism, and people who repeat the phrase are intentionally or not perpetuating that problem. It has now as a result turned something we can all agree on (improving the lives of black folk) into something divisive we're here arguing about. That's an intentionally step from people who are racist, being unfortunately aided by normal non racist folk.

Fundamentally of course all lives matter. Nobody is saying otherwise. But so do black lives. They can and should exist together. Helping black folk improve their lot in life helps us all, and doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't help everyone else too.

Why people need to "respond" with "All lives matter" is completely beyond me.

Hopefully that makes sense!

Edited by IAmNick
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
  • Flames 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ska Junkie said:

Without getting political, why is 'all lives matter' provocative? I don't get it Marcus.

 

To put it more allegorically than @IAmNick

Imagine you were on a demo to save the whale, because whales are still hunted by some nations and with global plastic pollution etc, are still critically endangered.

You then see a counter demo with banners saying "All Marine Creatures Matter Not Just Whales".

That demo would be diluting and undermining the focused point you were making. Yes, all marine creatures do have a right to life, but the situation is particularly relevant to whales as they are under more threat than many other species. Trying to minimise the specific point Save The Whales was making with obvious generalities is a way of negating it.

 

  • Like 8
  • Flames 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CyderInACan said:

What could be more cowardly than hitting someone just because they support a different football club. I mean how pathetic is that. 

you may as well have a fight because you prefer different breakfast cereals. Or you prefer dogs rather than cats. 

Comparing football to cereal is pretty funny. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

 It's a fair question, and it's one of context really.

As I'm sure you know the "Black lives matter" slogan is quite a few years old now, highlighting social and systematic racism. There have been a few high profile events in recent years, especially in the US.

An important part is that saying "Black lives matter" isn't saying all lives don't matter.  "All lives matter" was and is primarily said as some weird response to saying "Black lives matter", and seems to imply that the problems it's trying to highlight should be downplayed or are ignored because what about other problems. Nobody is denying other groups and people also face huge challenges and issues in their lives, which of course matter.

It would be slightly analogous to if you had a family member who had breast cancer (as I have) and went on a charity walk to raise money for it. In response, you had people up there with "All cancers matter" banners, or saying "So what you don't care about my heart disease?" or "Yeah so you want to cut my diabetes treatment do you?" and so on. Provocative in my mind, to use your word. Other people have said if your house was on fire, and your neighbour was demanding the firemen also spray a load of water on their house, because their house matters too.

Further on from that actual racists (and I'm not saying everyone who says "All lives matter" is racist, to be clear) have then co-opted the phrase to intentionally shut down discussions about racism, and people who repeat the phrase are intentionally or not perpetuating that problem. It has now as a result turned something we can all agree on (improving the lives of black folk) into something divisive we're here arguing about. That's an intentionally step from people who are racist, being unfortunately aided by normal non racist folk.

Fundamentally of course all lives matter. Nobody is saying otherwise. But so do black lives. They can and should exist together. Helping black folk improve their lot in life helps us all, and doesn't mean we can't and shouldn't help everyone else too.

Why people need to "respond" with "All lives matter" is completely beyond me.

Hopefully that makes sense!

It isn't analogous. The context is the words were included on a banner stating what the group was, a message for a police Superintendent and this was displayed in BS1 by a group that was not exclusively white. This group cannot be perpetuating anything associated with racism, it’s quite the opposite. The group was multiracial.

There was no aid given to any racists. None. Bristol has no far-right groups of any significance. The racist oddballs in caves that there are would loathe knowing who bought the banner, their backgrounds, knowing they were not anything to do with the far-right.

Unfortunately, there are left wing groups who don't like it as well. There is your division. As Steve highlighted in the article. 

Edited by Cowshed
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

I was merely pointing out what I’ve pointed out consistently - that this isn’t fisticuffs between like minded people (as your first note said it was), but mindless thuggery disregarding anyone who got in the way (as regrettably happened to you in the second note).

Your second note disproves the first theory, as do a lot of recollections on here. Nobody denies CSF protected you. But if you’d have been Walsall fans and the CSF emerged from a pub, at that time the self same would have happened unless - again, by some miracle - CSF were the only “firm” in the country who didn’t go after any other fans.

You didn't answer my question

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mike Stone said:

You didn't answer my question

Well. As your question was

3 hours ago, Mike Stone said:

Out of interest what would you of done if you stumbled across our predicament back that day.

Helped some fellow City supporters out or let us get a good kicking.

 

And you believe…

7 hours ago, Mike Stone said:

Hardly cowardly if it's two groups of like minded individuals having a square up.  These blokes arnt wondering down the street kicking lumps out of just anyone it's generally pre organised and I'd imagine takes some bottle if your in to that sort of thing.

Cowardly is someone sitting behind a key board giving it the big I am!

Then, by your own words, they weren’t kicking lumps out of just anybody. So, using your logic, I’d be on safe grounds to assume the following:

- You’d happily entered into said fight with said Walsall fans

- If I walked on by they wouldn’t start on me

So, I wouldn’t want to break up your pre arranged shindig. After all, they don’t kick lumps out of just anyone and it’s generally pre organised.

That’s the only logical answer to your question if I’m not in your firm (you must be in a firm to be in the fight by your logic).

The alternate is that the CSF worship is just bollocks and they were as bad as anyone else, but that seems to be a very inconvenient truth.

  • Like 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Well. As your question was

And you believe…

Then, by your own words, they weren’t kicking lumps out of just anybody. So, using your logic, I’d be on safe grounds to assume the following:

- You’d happily entered into said fight with said Walsall fans

- If I walked on by they wouldn’t start on me

So, I wouldn’t want to break up your pre arranged shindig. After all, they don’t kick lumps out of just anyone and it’s generally pre organised.

That’s the only logical answer to your question if I’m not in your firm (you must be in a firm to be in the fight by your logic).

The alternate is that the CSF worship is just bollocks and they were as bad as anyone else, but that seems to be a very inconvenient 

That's a no then

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

It’s a no, because, as your other posts confirm, you must have been happy to be in the fight to start with. I’d have hated to impinge on your activity. Frankly, if I was you, I’d be annoyed that the CSF had joined in without asking.

Oh god you've seen right through me, we always take a six year old along with us when we want a good punch up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sixtyseconds said:

Because it is political.

Woke culture decides its provocative.

They want compliance.

You cant say that because we say so.

Its rotten.

 

Makes sense, as do the other explanations.

I don't do 'woke' so find this all rather anal tbh. If they 'want  compliance', they can damn well do one. They will grow up eventually.

You can't say this, even though it's correct, as it might upset someone making pretty much the same point. WTF is that about? 

Thanks for the explanations peeps.

No offence to anyone's beliefs btw.

Edited by Ska Junkie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Makes sense, as do the other explanations.

I don't do 'woke' so find this all rather anal tbh. If they 'want  compliance', they can damn well do one. They will grow up eventually.

You can't say this, even though it's correct, as it might upset someone making pretty much the same point. WTF is that about? 

Thanks for the explanations peeps.

No offence to anyone's beliefs btw.

Does that make sense though?

It doesn't line up with any of the other explanations you've got. In fact I'd say it's not an explanation at all personally.

I'd also ask what's wrong with sometimes not saying something if it upsets people. I expect we all do that don't we?

I certainly make an effort to. If someone explains to me something I say is hurtful or I don't fully understand I listen. I don't think that's being silenced/got the by "woke" mob/made to comply or anything. 

Who has been made to comply here exactly? The group with an article explaining their point of view in the paper? Hah!

That's just an excuse to be the selfish "I just tells it as I sees it" bloke who does what he wants and to hell with anyone else.

 

2 hours ago, Cowshed said:

It isn't analogous. The context is the words were included on a banner stating what the group was, a message for a police Superintendent and this was displayed in BS1 by a group that was not exclusively white. This group cannot be perpetuating anything associated with racism, it’s quite the opposite. The group was multiracial.

There was no aid given to any racists. None. Bristol has no far-right groups of any significance. The racist oddballs in caves that there are would loathe knowing who bought the banner, their backgrounds, knowing they were not anything to do with the far-right.

Unfortunately, there are left wing groups who don't like it as well. There is your division. As Steve highlighted in the article. 

The group being multicultural is irrelevant and shows you've missed the point totally.

You can't just write whatever you want and go "not racist by the way" as a magical get out of jail free card.

I see there being a few options:

- People there knew the meaning/context and were racist. Probably very few imo.

- People decided to stand behind a banner with a slogan they didn't research or understand because it sounded good or people they knew were. Probably most imo. But I'd argue ignorance isn't an excuse, and if I was going to pose with something similar I'd want to make sure I understood it.

- People didn't care and just turned up with mates thinking a horde of "antifa" were on there way (whose population is probably smaller than your racist one mentioned above) and they could have a few beers and a scrap. A few.

Just because they didn't appreciate the context doesn't mean you can just say it therefor doesn't exist. Context matters greatly.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IAmNick said:

Does that make sense though?

It doesn't line up with any of the other explanations you've got. In fact I'd say it's not an explanation at all personally.

I'd also ask what's wrong with sometimes not saying something if it upsets people. I expect we all do that don't we?

I certainly make an effort to. If someone explains to me something I say is hurtful or I don't fully understand I listen. I don't think that's being silenced/got the by "woke" mob/made to comply or anything. 

Who has been made to comply here exactly? The group with an article explaining their point of view in the paper? Hah!

That's just an excuse to be the selfish "I just tells it as I sees it" bloke who does what he wants and to hell with anyone else.

 

The group being multicultural is irrelevant and shows you've missed the point totally.

You can't just write whatever you want and go "not racist by the way" as a magical get out of jail free card.

I see there being a few options:

- People there knew the meaning/context and were racist. Probably very few imo.

- People decided to stand behind a banner with a slogan they didn't research or understand because it sounded good or people they knew were. Probably most imo. But I'd argue ignorance isn't an excuse, and if I was going to pose with something similar I'd want to make sure I understood it.

- People didn't care and just turned up with mates thinking a horde of "antifa" were on there way (whose population is probably smaller than your racist one mentioned above) and they could have a few beers and a scrap. A few.

Just because they didn't appreciate the context doesn't mean you can just say it therefor doesn't exist. Context matters greatly.

You are telling me I cant write whatever. You do not control the English language. I stated a fact. You state context matters greatly after stating its irrelevant in your first sentence. As expected a lot of rules. Your rules. 

Its nonsense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

You are telling me I cant write whatever. You do not control the English language. I stated a fact. You state context matters greatly after stating its irrelevant in your first sentence. As expected a lot of rules. Your rules. 

Its nonsense. 

I'm not telling you you can't write something. You can write whatever you like, and people can comment on what you write. And that's what has happened here.

 

Not my rules. Our societies rules - words and actions have context. Otherwise why is the cenotaph special? It's just stones... but there's context behind it. It has great meaning to us.

Why do you argue taking the knee is divisive? Because you see context behind it. Why is a banana being thrown on a football pitch wrong? It's just fruit. Fruit isn't bad. Why does anyone care? Context.

Are those "my rules" too? That's how language and actions work.

Things we do and say don't exist in a complete vacuum at all times, to be totally defined by us however we want in the given situation.

  • Like 4
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IAmNick said:

A guy I go to football with (lifelong City fan) was headbutted and had his tooth knocked out by a well known CITY hooligan around 25 years ago. This was supposedly our "protectors" attacking us.

His crime? It was an away match and his CHILD son was wearing a European football shirt this meathead mistook for the away team. They were with the City fans and others in the group had City tops on. The bloke starting threatening and swinging this CHILD around by his shirt/scarf outside after the game, dad stepped between them and got his teeth knocked out as a result.

Protectors my arse.

Sounds more like virtual signaling to me ;) 

sounds like bullshit to me...

  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Does that make sense though?

It doesn't line up with any of the other explanations you've got. In fact I'd say it's not an explanation at all personally.

I'd also ask what's wrong with sometimes not saying something if it upsets people. I expect we all do that don't we?

I certainly make an effort to. If someone explains to me something I say is hurtful or I don't fully understand I listen. I don't think that's being silenced/got the by "woke" mob/made to comply or anything. 

Who has been made to comply here exactly? The group with an article explaining their point of view in the paper? Hah!

That's just an excuse to be the selfish "I just tells it as I sees it" bloke who does what he wants and to hell with anyone else.

I cant disagree with that at all Nick and asked, for more than anything,  my own education.

I most certainly wouldn't comply with something I disagree with but neither would I comply with something I plain don't understand.

To me it appears a group or, dare I say, generation, are looking for reasons to be offended rather than looking for solutions. Maybe if the effort to be offended / protest was put into finding any solution, those of us that don't really get it would be more supportive? I really don't know.

I watched a video this morning of an Aussie chap stood silently with an Australian flag while loads of people walked passed shouting about police brutality. Rather than control the mob, the police told the guy with the flag to move on or be arrested for 'potentially causing a breach of the peace'. 

Isn't this all the wrong way around?

Edited by Ska Junkie
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sixtyseconds said:

Because it is political.

Woke culture decides its provocative.

They want compliance.

You cant say that because we say so.

Its rotten.

 

The same “woke culture” who decides the knee must be political?

They want compliance.

You can’t say it’s not political because we say so.

Anyway @Ska Junkie Nick answered it much better than I could.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

I cant disagree with that at all Nick and asked for, more than anything,  my own education.

I most certainly wouldn't comply with something I disagree with but neither would I comply with something I plain don't understand.

To me it appears a group or, dare I say, generation, are looking for reasons to be offended rather than looking for solutions. Maybe if the effort to be offended / protest was put into finding any solution, those of us that don't really get it would be more supportive? I really don't know.

I actually agree with you in part here - I think many people are far too quick to assume someone is being malicious or evil, when often it's just being a bit clumsy or not fully understanding of something. We're all guilty of that sometimes. I know I definitely am and have put my foot in it on multiple occasions throughout my life! I think the difference is how we respond to it personally - make an effort, or refuse to.

That's why as I said I don't think most of the guys down there were racist, and I have no idea if they were right wing or not. I'm sure a fair number are decent people who would look out for anyone regardless of race/creed/whatever.  

7 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

I watched a video this morning of an Aussie chap stood silently with an Australian flag while loads of people walked passed shouting about police brutality. Rather than control the mob, the police told the guy with the flag to move on or be arrested for 'potentially causing a breach of the peace'. 

Isn't this all the wrong way around?

Good question and I have no idea without knowing the situation!

If you rocked up to a somber remembrance event about colonial slavery with a Saint George's Cross you could perhaps be suggested you were being intentionally provocative and potentially disturbing the peace. If it was remembrance day then good luck to you! Like I said above - all about context.

 

Edited by IAmNick
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

I actually agree with you in part here - I think many people are far too quick to assume someone is being malicious or evil, when often it's just being a bit clumsy or not fully understanding of something. We're all guilty of that sometimes. I know I definitely am and have put my foot in it on multiple occasions throughout my life! I think the difference is how we respond to it personally - make an effort, or refuse to.

That's why as I said I don't think most of the guys down there were racist, and I have no idea if they were right wing or not. I'm sure a fair number are decent people who would look out for anyone regardless of race/creed/whatever.  

Good question and I have no idea without knowing the situation!

If you rocked up to a somber remembrance event about colonial slavery with a St George's Cross you could perhaps be suggested you were being intentionally provocative and potentially disturbing the peace. If it was remembrance day then good luck to you! Like I said above - all about context.

 

Like turning up to a place where you are expecting BLM protestors to be with a banner displaying a phrase known to be provocative to the cause, I suppose.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IAmNick said:

I actually agree with you in part here - I think many people are far too quick to assume someone is being malicious or evil, when often it's just being a bit clumsy or not fully understanding of something. We're all guilty of that sometimes. I know I definitely am and have put my foot in it on multiple occasions throughout my life! I think the difference is how we respond to it personally - make an effort, or refuse to.

That's why as I said I don't think most of the guys down there were racist, and I have no idea if they were right wing or not. I'm sure a fair number are decent people who would look out for anyone regardless of race/creed/whatever.

Good post and nicely brought back on topic Sir.

If standing against  possible threat to a war memorial is classed as racist, I'm absolutely gob smacked as, in my very humble opinion, that is what by far the vast majority were there for. Indeed, if I hadn't been isolating at the time, I would have stood with them. Not in any way meant as a political stance, just standing in defence of something which, to many of us, is sacrosanct.

No doubt the poppy will be racist by their logic? Madness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

Like turning up to a place where you are expecting BLM protestors to be with a banner displaying a phrase known to be provocative to the cause, I suppose.

'All lives matter'? That's true though isn't it?

If someone were holding a banner saying 'black lives matter less than xxxx' I could understand the ire and would agree totally.

Anyway, to go back to the original thread topic, I have a certain amount of respect for what the CSF was back in the day, have no idea what they are up to know but I couldn't give a monkeys chuff about their political stance!

Edited by Ska Junkie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

'All lives matter'? That's true though isn't it?

If someone were holding a banner saying 'black lives matter less than xxxx' I could understand the ire and would agree totally.

You’re missing the point of context, it’s been explained many times.

People started saying all lives matter as a direct response to BLM.

I don’t think it can be explained any better than @IAmNick already has. Particularly the example of criticising say a breast cancer charity because all cancers are important. Or turning up to someone else’s funeral to tell them that your loved one died too.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/why-is-it-so-offensive-to-say-all-lives-matter-153188
 

And just to clarify again I don’t think everyone at the cenotaph was racist. No one has ever said they all were, probably just ignorance towards the meaning of the phrase on the banner in the context of a BLM protest. Add that to getting drunk and singing chants that didn’t really have a purpose, whilst “defending” something that didn’t really need defending they just look silly IMO

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

I'm not telling you you can't write something. You can write whatever you like, and people can comment on what you write. And that's what has happened here.

 

Not my rules. Our societies rules - words and actions have context. Otherwise why is the cenotaph special? It's just stones... but there's context behind it. It has great meaning to us.

Why do you argue taking the knee is divisive? Because you see context behind it. Why is a banana being thrown on a football pitch wrong? It's just fruit. Fruit isn't bad. Why does anyone care? Context.

Are those "my rules" too? That's how language and actions work.

Things we do and say don't exist in a complete vacuum at all times, to be totally defined by us however we want in the given situation.

Its half time..

All Lives Matter is a thing in America well a context is its four thousand miles away. However, you decide that this should define the use of language here. You want to enforce your rules of speech.

Society uses due process. Facts. The facts I posted are the context. The group was multi racial, the wording on the banner was unambiguous and clearly not racist. Facts. A context you then decided was irrelevant. Your rules. 

These were working class bloke, not linguists. People can have a different world view to yours and have different standards. Not wrong different.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

You’re missing the point of context, it’s been explained many times.

People started saying all lives matter as a direct response to BLM.

I don’t think it can be explained any better than @IAmNick already has. Particularly the example of criticising say a breast cancer charity because all cancers are important. Or turning up to someone else’s funeral to tell them that your loved one died too.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/why-is-it-so-offensive-to-say-all-lives-matter-153188
 

And just to clarify again I don’t think everyone at the cenotaph was racist. No one has ever said they all were, probably just ignorance towards the meaning of the phrase on the banner in the context of a BLM protest. Add that to getting drunk and singing chants that didn’t really have a purpose, whilst “defending” something that didn’t really need defending they just look silly IMO

 

I DO get it now Marcus, honestly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ska Junkie said:

'All lives matter'? That's true though isn't it?

Well of course.

Come on, you of all people know that 'opposing prejudice of all kinds' is not a political thing. There were loads of us 2Tone/ska lads at football and we've spent a lifetime opposing racism, as well as misogyny and class discrimination. Black lives matter *as well* is, pretty f cking obviously, the point.

Ask Suggs, Buster Bloodvessel, Terry Hall, Neville Staple... etc

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, City Rocker said:

Well of course.

Come on, you of all people know that 'opposing prejudice of all kinds' is not a political thing. There were loads of us 2Tone/ska lads at football and we've spent a lifetime opposing racism, as well as misogyny and class discrimination. Black lives matter *as well* is, pretty f cking obviously, the point.

Ask Suggs, Buster Bloodvessel, Terry Hall, Neville Staple... etc

Of course CR, I was just trying to educate myself on the latest reincarnation of the same issue TBH.

'Black lives matter as well' is an excellent but subtle change in terminology and one with which I wholeheartedly agree. 

Personally, I don't see anyone as a 'colour' just a person but that's just me and the way I was raised / grew up in the environments you mention. 

  • Like 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...